US beer giant Anheuser-Busch on Thursday rejected a 46-billion-dollar takeover bid from Belgian-Brazilian rival InBev as "financially inadequate and not in the best interests" of shareholders.

"InBev's proposal significantly undervalues the unique assets and prospects of Anheuser-Busch," said Patrick Stokes, the chairman of Anheuser-Busch's board.

"The proposed price does not reflect the strength of Anheuser-Busch's global, iconic brands Bud Light and Budweiser, the top two selling beer brands in the world, with Budweiser selling in more than 80 countries today."

Stokes said the proposal "also undervalues the earnings growth actions that the company had already planned, which have significant potential for shareholder value creation; the company's market position in the United States, the most-profitable beer market in the world; and the high value of its existing strategic investments."

However, they will no longer remain an independent company, and will most likely be sold to InBev. InBev is offering a price higher than the stock has been. Ever. Plus, the stock has done nothing for the past five years.

The company has weak defenses and is rife with nepotism, considering that the the current CEO is a descendant of the founder even though the original family controls 4% of the stock.

BUD will eventually be sold, almost certainly to a foreign buyer and almost certainly to InBev, even if the Belgians have to throw a couple more bucks to get the deal done.

and we'll be boycotting your former American product. If you think AB is just about marketing you clearly have never been to St. Louis. Let inbev initiate a hostile take over.. Schlafly's stadium will work just the same. The consumer base of the very product your investment sells just isn't in the mood for a foreign buyout of the king of beers. Budweiser won't be the first company to learn that share holders and their greed can't maintain market dominance on the sake of their returns.

InBev to go hostile as Anheuser rejects bid

By Jonathan Birchall in New York

Published: June 26 2008 22:05 | Last updated: June 27 2008 00:59

InBev, the world&#8217;s largest brewer, said on Thursday it would launch a hostile bid for Anheuser-Busch as its US rival rejected its $46bn bid as &#8220;financially inadequate&#8221;.

In court documents filed in the Court of Chancery in Delaware, InBev said it was preparing to launch a proxy battle seeking the removal of Anheuser&#8217;s entire board, citing &#8220;delays and apparent plans to attempt to block the acquisition&#8221;.

Shortly after the filing, Anheuser formally rejected InBev&#8217;s offer. August Busch IV, Anheuser&#8217;s chief executive, suggested in a letter to Carlos Brito, InBev&#8217;s chief executive, that the Belgian-Brazilian group was seeking to take advantage of the low level of the dollar and subdued US stock markets with an offer that undervalued Anheuser&#8217;s earnings potential.

While InBev said it still wanted a &#8220;constructive dialogue&#8221; over its $65-a-share offer, the exchange set the stage for a high-profile international battle for control of Anheuser, which controls almost half of the US beer market.

The battle for control of the maker of Budweiser and Michelob beers will unfold during a presidential election campaign in which free trade and foreign investment in the US is likely to be a significant theme.

InBev&#8217;s court filing said that it had been told by Mr Busch before launching the bid that he was opposed to any offer, and that Anheuser was &#8220;not for sale&#8221;. Mr Busch, according to InBev, also said he and his board were committed to the company&#8217;s independence.

In its letter to InBev, Mr Busch said Anheuser had developed plans to increase targeted savings to more than $1bn by 2010, building on an existing programme aimed at cutting an initial $400m in costs. The brewer is to give further details of its cost savings and plans &#8220;for accelerated earnings growth&#8221; to investors today.

InBev, meanwhile, is asking the court for a declaratory ruling that would confirm the shareholders&#8217; right to remove all 13 of Anheuser&#8217;s board members, without giving cause.

The brewer is asking for clarification of the legal status of five of the directors appointed in 2006, before changes were made that allow the removal of board directors by written consent.

John Coffee, a professor of corporate law at Columbia University, said the move to request the ruling from the Delaware courts was highly unusual, and characterised the filing as &#8220;an initial opening tactic&#8221; by InBev&#8217;s legal team.

and we'll be boycotting your former American product. If you think AB is just about marketing you clearly have never been to St. Louis. Let inbev initiate a hostile take over.. Schlafly's stadium will work just the same. The consumer base of the very product your investment sells just isn't in the mood for a foreign buyout of the king of beers. Budweiser won't be the first company to learn that share holders and their greed can't maintain market dominance on the sake of their returns.

Click to expand...

Okay, what other company has learned this lesson?

InBev have bought national brands around the world. Nothing changed. Americans aren't any more nationalistic than any other people, so as long as Bud keeps spending on marketing, it won't change here either. Even if Bud lost a couple of points in share, who cares? InBev is buying a great brand with the dollar at rock bottom valuations. Even with a couple lost points, when the currencies normalize, they'll still do very well.

A bidding war may erupt, but the company will almost certainly be sold to a foreign buyer as there is no other brewery in America that could buy Bud without triggering anti-trust issues.

Its sort of ironic that MO voted for a President who did more to destroy the value of the dollar than any other President since LBJ, and now foreign companies are buying American companies on the cheap.

InBev have bought national brands around the world. Nothing changed. Americans aren't any more nationalistic than any other people, so as long as Bud keeps spending on marketing, it won't change here either. Even if Bud lost a couple of points in share, who cares? InBev is buying a great brand with the dollar at rock bottom valuations. Even with a couple lost points, when the currencies normalize, they'll still do very well.

A bidding war may erupt, but the company will almost certainly be sold to a foreign buyer as there is no other brewery in America that could buy Bud without triggering anti-trust issues.

Its sort of ironic that MO voted for a President who did more to destroy the value of the dollar than any other President since LBJ, and now foreign companies are buying American companies on the cheap.

Click to expand...

Again, you CLEARLY have never been to St. Louis. If you think Americans, the ENTIRE demographic that appeals to the marketing of AB, will just continue drinking bud then so be it. It's laughable that you'd think that nothing would change. You think Americans are LESS nationalistic than any random dude from France? I realize that capitalists with wealth on the brain tend to miss a lot of factors that are not colored green but Bud isn't impervious to a boycott in this era of American Micro brews and unresolved domestic bitterness regarding the hemorrhaging of AMERICAN products. It's terribly naive of you to ignore how deep AB is to St Louis. If you think some german dude will be buying as much beer as any random beer drinker from this state then I hope you invest deeply before the stock plummets following a take over.

You assume that Bud will remain the king of beers afterward.. THAT, hopefully, will be an expensive lesson to learn as the prevelance of American Micro brews like Sam Adams, Boulivard, Schlaflys, and the rest step in where Bud dies off.

You are right, it is ironic as hell. Part of the reason Obama will have an easy time this year is directly because of the hindsight of Bush. However, that won't cause Americans to swallow a foreign owned beer who relies on it's AMERICAN marketing strategy. But, don't be too quick to blame Bush when clearly your concern about an American company is about as brittle as his concern of the American economy. To me, and a LOT of beer drinkers, you are just as much to blame for shitting in your own pool as he is. Your motives, if not strategy, is exactly the same.

Again, you CLEARLY have never been to St. Louis. If you think Americans, the ENTIRE demographic that appeals to the marketing of AB, will just continue drinking bud then so be it. It's laughable that you'd think that nothing would change. You think Americans are LESS nationalistic than any random dude from France? I realize that capitalists with wealth on the brain tend to miss a lot of factors that are not colored green but Bud isn't impervious to a boycott in this era of American Micro brews and unresolved domestic bitterness regarding the hemorrhaging of AMERICAN products. It's terribly naive of you to ignore how deep AB is to St Louis. If you think some german dude will be buying as much beer as any random beer drinker from this state then I hope you invest deeply before the stock plummets following a take over.

Click to expand...

I'm sure some people in MO will be upset. But why would anyone in California or Texas or Oregon care? MO isn't that important from an economic perspective. Its also hard to believe that everyone in MO would boycott it considering it would still be one of the largest employers in the state. Oh, as a counter proposal to fend off the InBev take-over, IV is offering to fire more workers than InBev said they will.

You assume that Bud will remain the king of beers afterward.. THAT, hopefully, will be an expensive lesson to learn as the prevelance of American Micro brews like Sam Adams, Boulivard, Schlaflys, and the rest step in where Bud dies off.

Click to expand...

Frankly, I never touch the shit. I'm an unabashed beer snob and consumer of microbrews who thinks that injecting carbonation into a beer brewed with rice is a cardinal sin. I'm also a former beer salesman, so I know a bit about the business, and I can tell you that Bud will be the king of beers for a long, long time. It has an astonishing ~43% market share, 20+ points higher than its nearest rival. Your average beer drinker can't tell the difference in taste between typical mass produced beers. They identify with the brand. "I'm a Bud Man," king of beers, etc etc. They won't care much after its taken over and whomever is the new owner spends tens of millions of dollars plastering American flags all over the brand.

You are right, it is ironic as hell. Part of the reason Obama will have an easy time this year is directly because of the hindsight of Bush. However, that won't cause Americans to swallow a foreign owned beer who relies on it's AMERICAN marketing strategy. But, don't be too quick to blame Bush when clearly your concern about an American company is about as brittle as his concern of the American economy. To me, and a LOT of beer drinkers, you are just as much to blame for shitting in your own pool as he is. Your motives, if not strategy, is exactly the same.

Click to expand...

Current management is poor and are not creating shareholder value. The purpose of a company is to make money and continue to grow the business. My institution owns a LOT of stock. InBev is offering cash. We will be voting for a sale to whomever pays the most.

I'm sure some people in MO will be upset. But why would anyone in California or Texas or Oregon care? MO isn't that important from an economic perspective. Its also hard to believe that everyone in MO would boycott it considering it would still be one of the largest employers in the state. Oh, as a counter proposal to fend off the InBev take-over, IV is offering to fire more workers than InBev said they will.

In the mid west it IS important though. People in oregon drink coors products anyway. Texas? Miller. California? the same. But, I'll give you an answer anyway: BECAUSE AMERICANS ARE TIRED OF WATCHING THEIR SHIT BE SOLD OFF AT YARDS SALE PRICES TO FOREIGNERS. Remember when a port was to be sold to Dubai? didn't work out too well, did it? I suggest you take a walk around the internet and browse the feedback to each story about this. Indeed, An Icon marketed on it's AMERICANISM sure WONT be pounded into dust by competition for running such farcical bullshit after being bought out by euros, eh?

Indeed, IV has to scramble to keep this lecherous european fuck from acting like the goddamn borg. SUPPORT DESPITE LAYOFFS SHOULD TELL YOU A THING OR TWO ABOUT HOW DEEP THIS ISSUE GOES.

and, please, let's not get all twinkle eyed about inbevs CRAFTED statements. You can no more predict the truth of their dangled carrot than, apparently, you can conceive the impending hemorrhage to microbrews.

Frankly, I never touch the shit. I'm an unabashed beer snob and consumer of microbrews who thinks that injecting carbonation into a beer brewed with rice is a cardinal sin. I'm also a former beer salesman, so I know a bit about the business, and I can tell you that Bud will be the king of beers for a long, long time. It has an astonishing ~43% market share, 20+ points higher than its nearest rival. Your average beer drinker can't tell the difference in taste between typical mass produced beers. They identify with the brand. "I'm a Bud Man," king of beers, etc etc. They won't care much after its taken over and whomever is the new owner spends tens of millions of dollars plastering American flags all over the brand.

Who is talking about taste? Of course BW is swill compared to hoegaarden. Of COURSE cardinals fans aren't sticking up a pinky at baseball games. Do you think they are like beer zombies running to the beer flame like a fucking moth? Yes, thats the share one gets from, as you said yourself, being MARKETED well. Inbev's ownership kills that whole beast in its tracks. Need evidence? Read the St Louis Post and ask yourself why Miller seems to be ready to pounce with claws extended. You seem to think this local branding is impervious to change after this hostile take over. I think you underestimate the class of people who drink BW by far.

Current management is poor and are not creating shareholder value. The purpose of a company is to make money and continue to grow the business. My institution owns a LOT of stock. InBev is offering cash. We will be voting for a sale to whomever pays the most.

share holder value doesn't increase production if the masses stop drinking their beer. Again, I hope you do have a lot of stock and I hope you invest a lot into this so you can learn a thing or two about consumer prerogative when it comes to the hijacking of a starkly American brand.

Useful Searches

About USMessageBoard.com

USMessageBoard.com was founded in 2003 with the intent of allowing all voices to be heard. With a wildly diverse community from all sides of the political spectrum, USMessageBoard.com continues to build on that tradition. We welcome everyone despite political and/or religious beliefs, and we continue to encourage the right to free speech.

Come on in and join the discussion. Thank you for stopping by USMessageBoard.com!